Effective Factors on Souvenir Purchase: The Case of ...€¦ · According to MacCannell (2002), purchase is viewed as one of the most important activities among tourists (MacCannell,

F. Vasheghani‐Farahani; K. Esfandiar and A. Tajzadeh‐Namin

147

Enlightening Tourism. A Pathmaking Journal, Vol. 4, No 2 (2014), pp.147-167 ISSN: 2174-548X

Effective Factors on Souvenir Purchase: The Case of Foreign Tourists' Viewpoint in Tehran City

Farzaneh Vasheghani-Farahani Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran (Iran)

[email protected]

Kourosh Esfandiar Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran (Iran)

[email protected]

Abolfazl Tajzadeh-Namin Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran (Iran)

[email protected]

ABSTRACT The present research aims to gain a better understanding of determinants on the souvenir-purchase behavior of inbound tourists, a vital factor affecting tourists’ experience in destinations, yet scant attention has been devoted to this in the literature. Drawing on the Oh’s travel expenditure model (2007), this study examines the influence of three types of variables: individual traveler characteristics; trip characteristics; and the perceived value of the souvenirs on tourists’ spending on shopping. The results obtained, through an analysis of self-administered questionnaires gathered from a sample of 115 inbound tourists in Tehran city, showed that men tent to spend more on souvenir purchase than women; there is not a significant relationship in terms of shopping spending patterns between leisure tourists and business tourists; and design, traditional motifs, quality and portability of souvenirs affect purchase behavior considerably. Further analysis and other findings are also discussed, and recommendations for future research are put forth in this paper.

KEYWORDS:

Souvenir purchase, inbound tourists, Tehran city.

ECONLIT KEYS L83; R19; O53.


148


1. INTRODUCTION

Souvenir may remind us a place, an occasion or even a person (Swanson & Timothy,

2012). Souvenir purchasing whether for others or one’s personal use, either way, gives

rise to the tangibility of the trip for the visitor to the point that encourages one’s memory

to remember the important events of his or her own lives known as ‘Strategic Memory

Protection’ (Zauberman, 2009). There are of course a variety of motivating forces for

buying souvenirs among tourists including purchasing a souvenir as a gift (Kim et al,

2001; Gordon; 1986), as a symbol (Gordon, 1986) or as a memento of the visit (Littrell et

al. 1994; Swanson, 2004).

According to MacCannell (2002), purchase is viewed as one of the most important

activities among tourists (MacCannell, 2002). Shopping souvenir is a behavior occurs

during activities, including trips and other leisure times. In fact, not many people pass

their holidays without shopping tangible objects (Littrell et al., 1994). The type of

souvenirs is different from one person to another and from one experience to the other

one. It may be a luxury and unique artwork or an ordinary item, a t-shirt or be a painted

curtain or a poster with a different snow view. But what makes us study about souvenir

shopping is that it covers a considerable part of purchase price in the tourism industry,

as in previous researches about shopping, it seems that one third of travel expenses is

allocated to purchasing (Littrell et al., 1994). Purchasing impulsively results from tourists’

desires in the destination and is regarded as a good income source for retailers.

Obviously, such unplanned purchases happen when buyers enter into indicating that

they just feel like purchasing frivolously, rather than getting a specific item (Timothy,

2009).

Regarding the importance of tourism in the economic development, tourism policy

makers strive to make the industry attractive both tourists and residents. In order to

attract tourists and increase their length of stay, knowing deeply their shopping behavior

is an important factor. Accordingly, the current study aims to investigate the

determinants of souvenir-purchase behavior of inbound tourists to Tehran. In fact, the

study examines the influence of three types of variables; individual traveler

characteristics; trip characteristics; and the perceived value of the souvenirs on tourists’


149


spending on shopping. Finally, the souvenirs purchased by foreign tourists in Tehran will

be classified based on their popularity and tendency to purchase.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

Shopping centers are not only considered as one of the main tourist attractions, but

they have also, a significant link with the other tourist attractions in cities. Shopping

centers have a leading role in bringing about a good atmosphere in the destination and

among tourists as well to the point that some view them as one of the most attractive

spot of the destination. In most urban tourism types, shopping is considered a

secondary motivation, showing the tendency and motivation of tourists to pass their time

shopping at trading centers in the visiting cities and its contribution to their tourism

experiences. Therefore, tourism destinations try to plan for providing such environments

for obtaining higher earnings (Saghaei et al., 2012). In order to better perceive about the

current circumstance of souvenir purchase in city of Tehran, it is important to know the

studies carried out in Iran (Table 1):

Researcher(s) and the time of study

Investigating Area

Yazdani (2007) An Investigation on Influencing Factors on Tourist Shopping Attitude of Iranian Handmade Carpet in Isfahan city

Zargham & Atrsaee (2009)

The Relationship between Demography Factors and Handicraft Shopping Behavior of European Tourists in Isfahan city

Saghaei et al.(2011) Analysis of The Role of Shopping Centers in Relation to Tourism and Pilgrimage in Metropolises (Case Study: Mashhad)

Karoubi et al. (2012) Analysis of Route Selection Behavior by Tourists in Tabriz Historical Bazaar

Table 1: Studies on shopping and tourism in Iran. Own elaboration.

There are no studies regarding tourists entering Tehran yet. Since Tehran is the

political capital and the largest city in Iran, plus the fact that it holds the Imam Khomeini

International Airport, which is the largest international airport of Iran from which most


150


international passengers enter and exit the country, the present study has special

importance.

In research conducted outside of Iran (Mok & Lam, 1997), upon the extension of

Keown Model that includes studies on Taiwan tourists’ shopping behavior in Hong Kong,

a model is introduced that shows significant relationships among shopping models, the

aim of the trip and age, as well as a very strong connection between earning and

shopping costs. According to their findings, Mok and Iverson (2000) expressed that

tourists’ shopping behavior could be anticipated from four viewpoints: (i) tourist

characteristics, such as culture, age, gender, income, education, family life circle; (ii)

trip’s characteristics, such as goal, type, e.g. either as tour or individual trip, trip length,

fellow travelers, previous visitors; (iii) destination characteristics, such as types and

diversity of goods, price privilege, retail sellers strategy, quality, services, show, place;

and (iv) occasional characteristics, such as weather and time (like Christmas or Chinese

New Year).

2.1) INDIVIDUAL TRAVELER CHARACTERISTICS

Iranian and foreign tourists’ shopping behavior is different considering their age,

gender and earnings, showing that personal characteristics of the tourists influence their

shopping tendency and behavior. Lehto et al. (2004) argued that the aim of the trip, age

and gender are the influencing factors on souvenir purchasing.

H1: Demographic factors have a positive influence on souvenir purchase amount.

2.1.1) GENDER

Investigating gender differences makes an important part of tourism behavior study

(Swain, 1995). Researches show that women often tend to buy more souvenirs rather

than men’s (Anderson & Littrell, 1995). Findings about shopping motivations present

important understandings about consumers’ behavior. The role of souvenir as gift is

more powerful among women.

H1a: Women’s tendency toward souvenir purchase in Tehran is more than men’s.


151


2.1.2) AGE

Generally, age and aim of trip make considerable anticipations about consumer

behavior. However, the findings about age and cost are somehow contradictory for

example, Timothy (2005) mentions that age has not been known in tourist’s shopping

behavior yet. Literature shows that, souvenir priorities have changed the trip experience

in lifecycle (Smith & Olson, 2001). Investigations show that people’s age makes objects

mean differently. Thus, generally, people show less interest to shopping goods and in

turn they show more tendency to pay much money for family relationships and qualified

experience by getting older (OH, 2007). Upon studying lifecycle of different families by

considering a great population of New Zealand International Visitors, as well as

considering tourist expenses, Lawson (1991) found out that among three groups -

bachelors, young couples and solitary survivors -, solitary survivors pay more for

shopping; therefore, their shopping is significant, they spend 41.4% of their trip cost for

shopping (Lawson, 1991).

H1b: The older the people, the more their tendency toward souvenir purchase.

2.1.3) HOUSEHOLD INCOME AND EDUCATION

Considering leisure time, researchers determine income as one of the most important

characteristics of household for shopping model (Cai et al., 1995). According to Jang et

al. (2004; 2005), there are some witnesses proving that household incomes, together

with education levels, influence on consideration of holidays and consumption during the

trip (Dardis et al., 1994). The effects of different families on recreation and entertainment

have been investigated; they found out, income has an important role in determining

family recreation and entertainment cost. In 1990, while investigating consumers’

expenses, Cai et al. (1995) considered a consumption model for families’ leisure time in

food, housing, transportation and entertainment in USA. Findings show that income has

a positive and significant influence in all four groups (Agarwal & Yochum, 1995). While

fewer studies consider the influence of income on tourists shopping behavior, the results

are somehow different (Lee, 2002).

In a festival tourism, Lee (2002) studies domestic tourists’ consumption models in five

different levels: residence, food and drink, shopping, transportation and other


152


entertainment costs. Among the population and social variables studied, Lee (2002)

observes that household income just affects tourists' payment for souvenir and local

special products shopping rather more than that of the others. Therefore, the present

literature shows that income is a key index for the determination of the number of leisure

time’s trips. However, it is not clear that how family income influence on tourists

shopping behavior.

H1c: People income has a positive influence on souvenir purchase amount.

H1d: Education has a positive influence on souvenir purchase amount

2.2) TRIP CHARACTERISTICS

In 2007, OH presented a model that shows that trip conditions affect shopping

amount. In this study, the influence of trip characteristics on passenger’s cost for

shopping is studied. He mentions trip dimensions that include trip activities, fellow

travelers, and other trip factors, such as trip season, trip type and transportation. Each of

such dimensions will be discussed as follows.

H2: Trip Characteristics have a positive influence on souvenir purchase amount.

2.2.1) PURPOSE OF PURCHASE

Studies show that recreational travel tourists, spend more on trips in comparison with

the other ones (who travel to visit their relatives, trade, festival, etc. (OH, 2007)).

Therefore,

H2a: Trade tourists show fewer tendencies toward souvenir purchase.

2.2.2) TRIP REPEAT

Kim and Littrell (2001) found out that the more people travel to a specific destination,

the more their perception toward the originality of souvenir shopping has changed. They

showed that the more people travel to Mexico, the less they want to buy stereotype

souvenirs, because the special souvenirs for tourists that is highly evocative of the

destination have been purchased in the first visit. Smith and Olson (2001) express that

knowing a destination through several visits may affect the meaning and types of


153


purchased souvenirs. Studies show that the first-time visitors of a place tend to shop

inexpensive, stereotype, trade or symbolic souvenirs. Upon increasing of awareness

about the destination in the next trips, they may change their minds and decide to

purchase meaningful handicrafts or visit the craftsmen directly, or the like. (Swanson &

Timothy, 2012; Collins-Krenier & Zins, 2011).

H2b: The people who travelled to Iran previously show fewer tendencies toward

souvenir purchase.

2.2.3) TRIP PARTY

Trip party may influence on buyers, whether leisure trips or business ones (Ng,

2003). Therefore, gender types of family members, friends, co-workers or youth

members of the family may affect different methods of group shopping behavior. Tauber

(1972, cited by OH, 2007) found out that, a social experience with friends is a social

motivation that encourages shopping.

H2c: Tourists who travel alone shop less souvenir than those travelling with groups.

2.2.4) TRANSPORTATION MODE

Lee (2002) also observes that, travelers who travel with personal car, in comparison

with the visitors travel with other transportation mode, like airplane, train, subway or bus,

shop more. Pysarchik (1989, cited by OH, 2007), that air travelers have less capability

for carrying goods when turning back, regarding the size, fragility and controllability. His

findings express that transportation options and substructures are important factors that

influence visitors’ shopping behavior.

H2d: Transportation mode has a positive influence on souvenir purchase amount.

2.3) PERCEIVED VALUE OF THE ENVIRONMENT

Scholars argue that both internal effects (consumer) and external ones (retail sellers)

have a valuable effects on making shopping as a leisure. Internal factors generally are

linked with issues like socializing, time scheduling, duty performing, knowing goods and

financial sources. External factors or retail selling include methods like good selection,


154


special price, retail selling environment, and sellers who affect buyers’ experience

(Timothy, 2009). OH (2007) maintains that value perceived by tourists, uniqueness,

attractiveness, and destination environment quality increase tourists feelings. Positive

feelings make positive value that increase tourist buyers’ enjoyment and excitement so

that increases the relationship between people and sellers. Positive feelings make

tourists spend more time and money on shopping.

H3: Perceived value of the environment increases souvenir purchase amount.

2.4) SOUVENIRS OF TEHRAN PROVINCE

The common handicrafts of Tehran province can be divided in three groups: urban,

rural and nomadic ones. The main handicrafts of Tehran province include engraving on

copper, turnery, basketry, incrustation, glass working, glass carving, Pile-less carpet

weaving (Ziloo), painting leather, carpet weaving and pottery, mat-making, varni-

weaving, hand-weaving, batik, tent textile weaving (Jajim), and kilim-weaving, cushion

cover, gunny, dyeing and spinning (Zendedel, 1999).

The model used for this research is the one presented by OH in 2007 (Figure 1).

Fig.1: Conceptual Model of Tourists Payments.

Source: OH (2007).


155


3. METHODOLOGY

The present research is a descriptive research and data were collected via a survey

in Tehran National Museum. The statistical population was inbound tourists entering

Tehran between November and December 2013. Data has gathered via a 21-item

questionnaire including open-ended and close-ended questions, distributed to 200

tourists of the 200 questionnaire distributed, 115 were collected and 110 were complete

and were able to be used. Data were analyzed by SPSS. Oh’s Model 2007 was used;

variables are classified in three parts including individual traveler characteristics; trip

characteristics; and the perceived value of the souvenirs on tourists’ spending on

shopping. A Cronbach coefficient alpha test was conducted on the 8 items to determine

the internal consistency of the scale used. The value of Cronbach alpha coefficient for

perceived-value is 0.839, which is a good score.

Demographic and Personal Characteristics of the Sample: The following table shows

collected data profiles by questionnaire.

Variables Index Level Percent Variables Index Level Percent

De

mog

raph

ic

Fac

tors

Na

tiona

lity

Hong Kong 12.06%

Trip

C

ond

ition

s

Trip

M

eans

Airplane 90%Italy 11.7% Train 1.8%China 909% Personal Car 1.8%French 7.2% Others 6.4%Germany 6.3%

Res

iden

ce

Day

s

1 day 3.6%USA 5.4% 2-4 Days 45.5%Australia 5.4%

More than 5 Days 50%Others 4.1%

Gender M 64.5%

Number of Trips Once 74.3%

F 35.5%2-4 Times 21%More than 5Times 4.8%

Age

Less than 20 2.8%

Trip Party

Alone 28.4%20-30 30.6% Family/Relatives 37.8%30-40 29.4% Coworkers 8.1%40-50 22% Friends 17.1%More than 50 15.6% Others 6.3%

Salary

Less than 2000 USD 27.9%

Expenditure

Less than 200 USD 55.9%2000-3000 USD 17.1% 200-400 USD 18.9%3000-4000 USD 19.8% 400-600 USD 7.2%4000-5000 USD 15.4% More than 600 USD 8.1%More than 5000 USD

5.4%No Response 8.1%

No Response 14.4%


156


Shopping Center

Tax-exempted Shops

1.8%

Purpose of Trip

Recreation 74.8%

Shopping Center 5.5% Trading 8.1%Traditional Bazaar 47.3% Visiting Relatives 7.2%

Museums 11.8%Recreation & Trading

8.1%

Others 0.9%Others 0.9%Museum with

Historical Website 32.7%

Education

High School 13.6%

Most Important Information Sources

Acquaintances 28.4%Bachelor’s Degree 34.5% Internet/Radio/TV 7.8%Master’s Degree & PhD

54.8% Guide Books 42.2%

Hotel/Airlines 6.9%Tourism Guide 2.9%Other 5.9%

Table 2: Frequency Distribution of Responses to their Favorite Souvenirs.

According to the collected data, purchased souvenirs by tourists are classified as

presented in Table 3.

Table 3 shows that inbound tourists in Tehran preferred to purchase pistachio, nuts,

sweets, tea, herbal drink, and saffron in terms of food, and rug, woodwork, kilim, jewelry

and miniature in terms of handicrafts. They paid a good attention to publications too

such as CDs, books, and postal cards.

Frequency Distribution of Purchased Souvenirs by

Tourists in Tehran

Frequency %

Frequency Distribution of Purchased Souvenirs by Tourists

in Tehran

Frequency %

Pistachio & Dried Nuts 56.8 Silversmith 22.5 Sweets 54.1 Turquoise Inlaying 18.9 Publications (Books, Music, Greetings Cards)

50.5 Mosaic 16.2

Tea & Herbal Drinks 45 Pottery 16.2 Saffron 37.8 Copper Products 14.4 Carpet 36.9 Enamelwork 13.5 Leather 27.9 Glazed Pottery 13.5 Wood Products 26.1 Silk Brocade 11.7 Kilim 24.3 Metal Work 11.7 Tile & Ceramic 24.3 Relief 10.8 Jewelry 23.4 Plaything 10.8 Traditional Painting 22.5 Filigree Work 9.9

Table 3: Purchased souvenirs by tourists.

4. RESULTS


157


4.1) ANALYTICAL STATISTICS

This part is about inferential statistics of data. The hypotheses are tested by statistical

tests and the results will be discussed. The hypotheses are firstly analyzed individually

and then the research purposes will be considered.

H1a: Women’s tendency for shopping souvenir in Tehran is more than men’s

Independent T-test is used for this hypothesis. According to analysis, two states are

considered for Independent T-test: supposing Equality of Variances and not-supposing

Equality of Variances. Also, we have another test, Levene's Test for Equality of

Variances.

Null hypothesis in this test is Equality of Variances that regarding a significant amount

(P<0.05 & F= 5.39), this hypothesis was not confirmed at P<0.05; therefore, the

Variances are not equal, and in order to do Independent T-test, we shall consider the

state of not-supposing Equality of Variances. But, Null hypothesis for Independent T-test

is Equality of Variances was not confirmed at 0.05 (P< 0.05 & T=2.24); thus, there is a

difference between men and women regarding the tendency toward souvenir purchase

(Table 4). Now, in order to determine which one has more tendencies toward souvenir

purchase, we use T-test to compare, and expenditure mean for men is more than

women, so, men tend to purchase souvenir more than women and this is the exact

reverse of our hypothesis.

Levene's Test for Equality of Var.

T-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. T Df Sig. (2

tailed)

Mean Dev

Standard Error of Diff

Confidence Interval 95%

Lower Bound

Upper Bound

Souvenir Purchase

Supposing Equality of Variances

5.39 0.02

2.08 108 0.04 0.41 0.2 0.02 0.79

Not Supposing Equality of Variances

2.24 96 0.03 0.41 0.18 0.05 0.77

P<0.05, P<0.1 Table 4: Independent T-test for Comparison Men’s & Women’s Souvenir Purchase.

H1b: The older the people, the more their tendency for shopping souvenir.


158


In order to test this hypothesis we use One Way ANOVA. Tables 5 and 6 are related to

this test. According to table 5, Null hypothesis that is Equality of Variances was

confirmed at 0.05 (P> 0.05 & F=0.65); therefore, senior visitors are not necessarily

willing to purchase more souvenirs upon getting older.

Variables Source

Sum of Squares

DF Mean-square F Sig.

Intra-groups 2.62 4 0.65 0.65 0.628 Inter-groups 105.6 105 1 Total 108.2 109 P< 0.05, P< 0.1

Table 5: One Way ANOVA for the Comparison Souvenir Purchase among Age Groups.

H1c: People’s income has a positive influence on purchase amount.

In order to test this hypothesis we use One Way ANOVA. The results show that Null

hypothesis that is Equality of Variances was confirmed at 0.05, however it fails at 0.1

(P=0.07 & F= 2.2); therefore, we fail Null hypothesis to the benefit of hypothesis one.

Thus, souvenir purchasing amount is different among different income levels. Now, in

order to find out which groups are different from each other, we use Paired-Samples T

test and the results shows, we have two sub-groups for incomes, since souvenir

purchasing amount in sub-group 2 is more, then this sub-group purchase souvenir more,

therefore, incomes higher than 2000 USD buy souvenir more.

H1d: Education has a positive influence on souvenir purchase.

In order to test this hypothesis, we use One Way ANOVA. According to data extracted,

Null hypothesis that is Equality of Variances is not failed at 0.05 (P>0.05 & F= 0.175);

therefore, education level has no effect on shopping.

H2a: Trade tourists show fewer tendencies for souvenir purchase.

In order to test this hypothesis, first we divide tourists to two trading and not-trading

groups. Then we use Independent T-test. On result, we can say that Null hypothesis that

is Equality of Variances of souvenir purchase in two trading and not-trading groups was


159


confirmed at 0.05 (with and without the hypothesis of Equality of Variances); therefore,

trading tourists tend to buy souvenir more than non-trading ones.

H2b: The people who traveled to Iran previously, show fewer tendencies toward

souvenir purchase.

In order to test above hypothesis, first tourists are divided to two groups: first-time

traveler to Iran and several-time travelers to Iran; then, we use independent T-test. On

result, Null hypothesis that is Equality of Variances of souvenir purchase in two First-

time & Several-time travelers groups was confirmed at 0.05 (with and without the

hypothesis of Equality of Variances); therefore, both groups tend to buy souvenir

equally.

H2c: Tourists who travel alone purchase less souvenirs than others.

In order to test above hypothesis, first, tourists are divided to two groups: the ones who

travel alone and those who travel in group; then, we use independent T-test.

According to analysis, Null hypothesis that is Equality of Variances of souvenir purchase

in two Tourists travel alone and Tourists not travel alone groups was confirmed at 0.05

(with and without the hypothesis of Equality of Variances); therefore, both groups tend to

buy souvenir equally.

H2d: Transportation mode has a positive influence on purchase amount.

Regarding to Table 2, 90% of respondents entered the country via air borders; hence,

this hypothesis may not be analyzed.

H3: Perceived value of the environment increases souvenir purchase amount.

In order to test this hypothesis, tourists were asked whether the characteristics of the

purchased goods have influenced on selecting them as souvenir or not. 80% of answers

were positive; then, they are asked to determine the characteristics which were

important to buy the souvenir. The group who responded the question as negative are

the ones who do not want to shop. Since the pertinent variables are ordinal, we used

non-parametric tests. At first, we examined Kruskal–Wallis Test (Table 6) in order to see


160


if there is any significant difference between the factors. The two tables below are

related to this test.

Perceived Value Chi-square test 106.248 Degrees of freedom 7 P-value 0

Table 6: Kruskal–Wallis Test for Equality of Means.

In table 6, test statistics in significant level less than 5% is meaningful. Therefore, the

null hypothesis was not confirmed. Thus, there is statistically significant difference

between Perceived Value factors for buying souvenir. Hypothesis in Kruskal–Wallis Test

is non-directional, e.g., they only show the difference and not the direction for larger or

smaller groups based on the mean. Then, we used the following order: initially we

multiplied rank’s average to 110 to achieve the general ranks, then calculated the below

quantities to compare the groups:

Perceived Value Factors Quantity Ranks’ Average Price 110 438.88 Quality 110 520.24 Design 110 534.21 Application 110 354.76 Lucky 110 275.55 Local Colors 110 404.54 Portable 110 472.62 Traditional Motif 110 523.20

Table 7: Importance of Handicrafts Evaluation Indexes.

D = General Rank of one group - General Rank of the other Group

Then calculate: (d – 0.8)/(Nˆ(3/2))

If Absolute value ≥ 9.94 (9.94 is dependent upon number of groups), then, the

hypothesis of equality of these two means will be denied. The order program was written

in R statistical software and the results are shown as pair comparison. Finally, upon

using means and results of Paired-Samples test, the classification is achieved for

Perceived Value factors in the importance of souvenir purchase:


161


Factors Rank Design 1 Traditional Motif 2 Quality 3 Portable 4 Price 5 Local Colors 6 Application 7 Lucky 8

Table 8: Priority of factors affecting Perceived Value according to tourists.

Therefore, Design, Traditional Motif, Quality & Portability are the most important

factors in souvenir shopping. And Application &Luck are the less important ones.

5. CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSIONS

The purpose of this study was to identify the key factors related to tourist’s souvenir

purchase expenditure and, more particularly, the effects of those factors on inbound

tourists in Tehran. By means of Oh’s travel expenditure model, this study examined the

influence of three types of variables: individual traveler characteristics; trip

characteristics; and the perceived value of the products on tourists’ spending on

souvenirs in Tehran. Based on the literature review, in each variable, subsets of the

variables such as the gender, age, household income, the purpose of the trip, individual

trip, souvenir’s traits and types were included to be examined for their influence on the

degree of souvenir purchase. Drawing on the Oh’s travel expenditure model (2007), the

hypothesized relationships were empirically tested. In this part, the findings from the

hypothesis testing are discussed:

Demographic characteristics, this study attempted to examine individual traveler

characteristics on shopping during the trip. In the current study, the variable was

comprised of gender, age, household income and education. As for gender of tourists,

based on previous studies that showed women’s tendency toward souvenir purchase,

the current study shows the opposite; that is, men had more tendencies toward souvenir

purchase than women’s. It was also found that there was no significant difference

between the participants and the amount of souvenir expenditures in terms of age and

the level of their education. But consistent with previous findings in tourism literature, the


162


group with the higher household income - more than 2000$ - was found to be positively

associated with spending on shopping.

Trip characteristics, this variable was comprised of the source of information, purpose

of purchase, first or repeat visit, trip party, and transformation mood. As for the purpose

of trip, results showed that there was not a significant relationship between leisure

tourists and business tourists with the inclination to spending on souvenirs. That was

similar results between those who visited Tehran city for the first time and those who

revisited, and trip party as well. The findings of the current study suggest that the market

of souvenir in Tehran is not able to stimulate inbound tourists’ curiosity and motivation.

The perceived value of souvenirs, based on review of literature, this study further

considered that perceived-value of the products as an important variable influences

tourists’ purchase behavior and as such increases the amount of purchase by tourists.

According to Table 7, three factors of design, traditional motifs, quality received the

rank’s average more than five hundred respectively, showing foreign tourists’ priorities in

purchasing Persian souvenirs in Tehran. It is of course necessary to do the same

research in other tourist destinations in Iran particularly in the cities of Isfahan, Shiraz

and Yazd being known for having many dexterous craftsmen as well as possessing a

large number of shops selling local crafts so as to better examine the factors design and

quality as the perceived value of the handicrafts. As for the other factors affecting

perceived value of tourists, the factor price was interestingly placed at the 5th rank. This

is a very important consideration in terms of price elasticity to those setting the price in

souvenir’s market. Price is not viewed as much importance as the factors including

design and quality. We should also keep in mind that the foreign tourists in Iran

spending more on souvenir purchase have a relatively high income; that is of course

congruous with H1c of the article. This may also suggest that the Iranian souvenirs are

relatively luxurious so that they cannot attract tourists with low income. Thus, it is

suggested the destination may need to supply the products with a range of different

prices so as to attract tourists with different household incomes. The findings of the

research shows that most visitors to Iran have little information on the diversity and

assortment of the souvenirs in Iran and in the same way there are not enough specific

objects that served as reminders of the destination or a special event in Iran and not


163


enough souvenir shops as well. As Gordon (1986) proposed there are some types of

souvenirs that might offer no reference to a particular place but they are inscribed with

words which identifies them in place and time and can become a souvenir full of

memories. Accordingly, the authors mention using traditional clothes of Iran marked with

the name of the destination or cultural sites to make up for this kind of souvenir

shortage.

Finally, the results showed that inbound tourists in Tehran preferred to purchase

pistachio, nuts, sweets, tea, herbal drink, and saffron in terms of food, and rug,

woodwork, kilim, jewelry and miniature in terms of handicrafts. They paid a good

attention to publications too, such as CDs, books, and postal cards. Tourists visiting Iran

are more independent and find it hard to carry many souvenirs with themselves and

suffice to a number of light souvenirs. So, it is suggested that destinations may need to

focus on portability of the souvenirs.

6. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS

Non-cooperation of hotel managers and tour leaders, as well as less foreign tourists

entering Iran during November and December, are some of the limitations of this

research. So many differences exist between the findings of previous researchers and

the results of the present one. So, we can conclude that each destination and tourist

may have different pattern to purchase souvenir. Also, since this research has been

done in a definite time interval, we cannot examine and study the influence of season on

shopping probability.

7. SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDIES

During data collection, so many tourists mentioned that they did not know Iran’s

handicrafts and souvenirs and they solely anything interesting for them while they had

no decision for. Therefore, special intention is needed for constant and easy shopping

when purchasing souvenir. Such shopping is suggested for next studies. Moreover, this

research may be done in different seasons to determine the influence of season on


164


shopping. Regarding low numbers of tourists during November and December, it was

not possible to divide tourists according to the original countries in this study. In case of

having many tourists, we can do this research according to the original country. As table

2 shows 22% of the tourists in this study came from China and Hong Kong. As Hansen

and Jangeresyed (2013) state tourists from these countries account for the highest

degree of purchase in the destinations. Due to the importance of purchase and their

good spending power, Chinese tourists’ souvenir purchase behavior is recommended

for the next study.

References Agarwal, V.; Yochum, G. Tourist Spending and Race of Visitors. Journal of Travel

Research, Vol. 38, Issue 2, 1995, pp. 173-176.

Anderson, L. F.; Littrell, M. A. Souvenir-purchase Behavior of Women Tourists. Annals

of Tourism Research, Vol. 22, Issue 2, 1995, pp. 328-358.

Cai, L. A.; Hong, G.; Morrison, A. Household Expenditure Patterns for Tourism Products

and Services. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, Vo. 4, Issue 4, 1995, pp. 15-39.

Collins-Kreiner, N.; Zins, Y. Tourists and souvenirs: changes through time space and

meaning. Journal of Heritage Tourism, Vol. 6, Issue 1, 2011, pp. 17 & 27.

Dardis, R.; Soberon-Ferrer, H.; Patro, D. Analysis of Leisure Expenditures in the United

States. Journal of Leisure Research, Vol. 13, Issue 3, 1994, pp. 181-194.

Gordon, B. The Souvenir: Messenger of the Extraordinary. Journal of Popular Culture,

Vol. 20, Issue 3, 1986, pp. 135-146.

Hansen, P.R. & Jangeresyed, S.. Review of China's Outbound Travel Market 2013,

Perspectives for Scandinavian City Tourism. Wonderful Copenhagen Research and

Development, Chinavia Project. 2013. From: http://www.visitcopenhagen.com/


165


Jang, S.; Bai, B.; Hong; G.; O'Leary; J. Understanding Travel Expenditure Patterns: A

Study of Japanese Pleasure Travelers to the United States. Tourism Management, Vol.

25, Issue 3, 2004, pp. 331-341.

Jang, S.; Cai, L.; Morrison, A.; O'Leary, J. The Effects of Travel Activities and Seasons

on Expenditure. International Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 7, Issue 6,2005, pp.

335-346.

Karoubi, M.; Banikamali, S.; Moradi, H. Analysis of Tourists Path in Tabriz Traditional

Bazaar. Iranian Journal of Management Studies Tourism, Vol. 7, Issue 19, 2012, pp. 91-

116.

Kim, S.; Littrell, M. A. Souvenir buying intentions for self-versus others. Annals of

Tourism Research, Vol. 28, Issue 3, 2001, pp. 638-657.

Lawson, R. Patterns of Tourist Expenditure and Types of Vacation across the Family

Life Cycle. Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 29, Issue 4, 1991, pp. 12-18.

Lee, H.C. Determinants of Visitor Expenditures on a Local Festival: A Tobit Analysis.

Tourism Research, Vol. 26, Issue 1, 2002, pp. 31-46.

Lehto, X. Y.; Liping, A. C.; O'Leary, J. T.; Huan, T. C. Tourist shopping preferences and

expenditure behaviors: The case of the Taiwanese outbound market. Journal of

Vacation Marketing, Vol. 10, Issue 4, 2004, pp. 320-332.

Littrell, M. A.; Baizerman, S.; Kean, R.; Gahring, S.; Niemeyer, S.; Reilly, R.; Stout. J.A.

Souvenirs and tourism styles. Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 33, Issue 1, 1994, pp. 3-

11.


166


MacCannell, D. Reflections and reviews: the ego factor in tourism. Journal of Consumer

Research, Vol. 29, Issue 1, 2002, pp. 146- 151.

Mok, C.; Iverson T. J. Expenditure-Based Segmentation: Taiwanese Tourists to Guam.

Tourism Management, Vol. 21, Issue 3, 2000, pp. 137-145.

Mok, C.; Lam T. A Model of Tourists’ Shopping Propensity: A Case of Taiwanese

Visitors to Hong Kong. Pacific Tourism Review, Vol. 1, Issue 2, 1997, pp. 137-145.

Ng, C. Satisfying shoppers; psychological needs: from public market to cyber-mall.

Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 23, Issue 4, 2003, pp. 439-465.

Oh, Y.J. An Exploration of Tourist Shopping. Texas, US: Submitted to the Office of

Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for

the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, 2007 August. From: http://repository.tamu.edu/

Saghaei, M.; Mafi, E.; Ghahfarokhi, Z. J. Analysis of the Role of Shopping Centers in

Relation to Tourism and Pilgrimage in Metropolises (Case Study: Mashhad). 2nd Year,

Arid Region Geographical Studies, No.7, 2012, pp. 77-101.

Smith, R.; Olson, L. Tourist Shopping Activities and Development of Travel

Sophistication. Visions in Leisure and Business, Vol. 20, Issue 1, 2001, pp. 23-33.

Swain, M. B. Gender in Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 22, Issue 2, 1995,

pp. 247-266.

Swanson, K. K. Tourists' and retailers' perceptions of souvenirs. Journal of Vacation

Marketing Vol. 10, Issue 4, 2004, pp. 363-377.

Swanson, K.K.; Timothy, D.J. Souvenirs: Icons of meaning, commercialization and

commoditization. Tourism Management, Vol. 33, Issue 3, 2012, pp. 489 & 499.


167


Timothy, D. J. Shopping Tourism, Retailing and Leisure. Clevedon, U.K. View

Publications. 2005.

Timothy, D. Sociology of Consumption (Tourism and Shopping), (A. A. Saeidi, Trans.)

Tehran: Jameshenasan. 2009.

Yazdani, M. An Investigation on Influencing Factors on Tourists Shopping; Attitude of

Iranian Handmade Carpet in Isfahan. Master Thesis, Lulea University of Technology,

Sweden. 2007. ISSN 1653.0187. From: http://epubl.ltu.se/

Zargham, H.; Atrsaee, B. The Relation of Demographic factors and European tourists

behavior to buy handcraft in Isfahan. Iranian Journal of Tourism Studies, Vol. 11, Issue

12, 2009, pp. 81-99.

Zauberman, G.; Rebecca K. R.; Kyu Kim, B. Memories as Assets: Strategic Memory

Protection in Choice over Time. Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 35, Issue 5, 2009,

pp. 715-728.

Zendedel, H. Comprehensive Iran Tourism (Tehran Province). Tehran, Irangardi

Publication. 1999.

Article info: Received 28/10/14. Accepted 26/12/14. Refereed anonymously.

Documents

Effective Factors on Souvenir Purchase: The Case of ...€¦ · According to MacCannell (2002), purchase is viewed as one of the most important activities among tourists (MacCannell,